Climate Change - The Scientific Debate (Vol. II)

Climate Change - The Scientific Debate (Vol. II)

Author
Discussion

Gadgetmac

14,984 posts

107 months

Thursday 25th June 2020
quotequote all
dickymint said:
Your "excerpts" are nice freshly picked cherries - you couldn't even bring yourself to quote the headline.....

"The Arctic is on fire: Siberian heat wave alarms scientists".
Yet another Dicky 'no science' mint post rolleyes

Like I'd have anything to gain by posting a link to that headline but not the headline itself.

Gadgetmac

14,984 posts

107 months

Wednesday 1st July 2020
quotequote all
Extreme warming of the South Pole.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/06/2006...

The South Pole has been warming at more than three times the global average over the past 30 years, according to recent research.

Extract:

Clem and his team analyzed weather station data at the South Pole, as well as climate models to examine the warming in the Antarctic interior. They found that between 1989 and 2018, the South Pole had warmed by about 1.8 degrees Celsius over the past 30 years at a rate of +0.6 degrees Celcius per decade -- three times the global average.

The study also found that the strong warming over the Antarctic interior in the last 30 years was mainly driven by the tropics, especially warm ocean temperatures in the western tropical Pacific Ocean that changed the winds in the South Atlantic near Antarctica and increased the delivery of warm air to the South Pole. They suggest these atmospheric changes along Antarctica's coast are an important mechanism driving climate anomalies in its interior.

Clem and Fogt argue that these warming trends were unlikely the result of natural climate change alone, emphasizing the effects of added anthropogenic warming on top of the large tropical climate signal on Antarctic climate have worked in tandem to make this one of the strongest warming trends worldwide.

robinessex

11,046 posts

180 months

Wednesday 1st July 2020
quotequote all
Gadgetmac said:
Extreme warming of the South Pole.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/06/2006...

The South Pole has been warming at more than three times the global average over the past 30 years, according to recent research.

Extract:

Clem and his team analyzed weather station data at the South Pole, as well as climate models to examine the warming in the Antarctic interior. They found that between 1989 and 2018, the South Pole had warmed by about 1.8 degrees Celsius over the past 30 years at a rate of +0.6 degrees Celcius per decade -- three times the global average.

The study also found that the strong warming over the Antarctic interior in the last 30 years was mainly driven by the tropics, especially warm ocean temperatures in the western tropical Pacific Ocean that changed the winds in the South Atlantic near Antarctica and increased the delivery of warm air to the South Pole. They suggest these atmospheric changes along Antarctica's coast are an important mechanism driving climate anomalies in its interior.

Clem and Fogt argue that these warming trends were unlikely the result of natural climate change alone, emphasizing the effects of added anthropogenic warming on top of the large tropical climate signal on Antarctic climate have worked in tandem to make this one of the strongest warming trends worldwide.
Just count the guessing words there then

robinessex

11,046 posts

180 months

Wednesday 1st July 2020
quotequote all
Gadgetmac said:
I'll count the science content of your post instead.
Almost your most useless post, again shoot the messenger, because that's the only ammunition you have left.

Gadgetmac

14,984 posts

107 months

Wednesday 1st July 2020
quotequote all
I'll count the science content of your post instead.

Oh...

robinessex

11,046 posts

180 months

Wednesday 1st July 2020
quotequote all
Gadgetmac said:
I'll count the science content of your post instead.

Oh...
Keep it up, more proof you have nowt to offer.

Gadgetmac

14,984 posts

107 months

Wednesday 1st July 2020
quotequote all
robinessex said:
Gadgetmac said:
I'll count the science content of your post instead.

Oh...
Keep it up, more proof you have nowt to offer.
I offer science from scientists in the field, your response, as always, is non-scientific bluster from the comfort of your armchair.

robinessex

11,046 posts

180 months

Wednesday 1st July 2020
quotequote all
Gadgetmac said:
robinessex said:
Gadgetmac said:
I'll count the science content of your post instead.

Oh...
Keep it up, more proof you have nowt to offer.
I offer science from scientists in the field, your response, as always, is non-scientific bluster from the comfort of your armchair.
There is no science there, just an article with lots of guessing words.

Gadgetmac

14,984 posts

107 months

Wednesday 1st July 2020
quotequote all
robinessex said:
Gadgetmac said:
robinessex said:
Gadgetmac said:
I'll count the science content of your post instead.

Oh...
Keep it up, more proof you have nowt to offer.
I offer science from scientists in the field, your response, as always, is non-scientific bluster from the comfort of your armchair.
There is no science there, just an article with lots of guessing words.
The first paragraph....

The South Pole has been warming at more than three times the global average over the past 30 years, according to research led by Ohio University professor Ryan Fogt and OHIO alumnus Kyle Clem.

Fogt, professor of meteorology and director of the Scalia Laboratory for Atmospheric Analysis, and Clem coauthored a paper with an international team of scientists published in the journal Nature Climate Change on the findings. According to the study, this warming period was mainly driven by natural tropical climate variability and was likely intensified by increases in greenhouse gas.

Now what have you got to refute this? Show your workings.

Gadgetmac

14,984 posts

107 months

Wednesday 1st July 2020
quotequote all
Data availability:

The station temperature, wind and radiosonde data are available online at https://legacy.bas.ac.uk/met/READER/.

ERA5 data are available online at https://www.ecmwf.int/en/forecasts/datasets/reanalysis-datasets/era5. ERSSTv.5

and OLR data are available online at https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/psd/data/gridded/index.html.

The CMIP5 data are available online at http://data.ceda.ac.uk/badc/cmip5.

Output from the CESM experiments are available from the authors upon request.

Code availability:

All code used to perform the calculations can be accessed at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3712453.

I await your deconstruction and new alternative analysis.


robinessex

11,046 posts

180 months

Wednesday 1st July 2020
quotequote all
Gadgetmac said:
robinessex said:
Gadgetmac said:
robinessex said:
Gadgetmac said:
I'll count the science content of your post instead.

Oh...
Keep it up, more proof you have nowt to offer.
I offer science from scientists in the field, your response, as always, is non-scientific bluster from the comfort of your armchair.
There is no science there, just an article with lots of guessing words.
The first paragraph....

The South Pole has been warming at more than three times the global average over the past 30 years, according to research led by Ohio University professor Ryan Fogt and OHIO alumnus Kyle Clem.

Fogt, professor of meteorology and director of the Scalia Laboratory for Atmospheric Analysis, and Clem coauthored a paper with an international team of scientists published in the journal Nature Climate Change on the findings. According to the study, this warming period was mainly driven by natural tropical climate variability and was likely intensified by increases in greenhouse gas.

Now what have you got to refute this? Show your workings.
A few snippets from the article:-

“but the individual contribution of each factor is NOT WELL UNDERSTOOD.

as well as CLIMATE MODELS to examine the warming

They SUGGEST these atmospheric changes

ARGUE that these warming trends were UNLIKELY”

So that's well dusted down and settled then. Nothing like lots of guessing if all else fails.

DocJock

8,341 posts

239 months

Wednesday 1st July 2020
quotequote all
Yeah, but the extract contained the word 'suggest' somewhere, so it's all bks. Have you learned nothing over the years?

robinessex

11,046 posts

180 months

Wednesday 1st July 2020
quotequote all
DocJock said:
Yeah, but the extract contained the word 'suggest' somewhere, so it's all bks. Have you learned nothing over the years?
Yea, never use the word suggest in any factual document. It's meaningless. Hard proof or nowt.

DocJock

8,341 posts

239 months

Wednesday 1st July 2020
quotequote all
You've never written a scientific paper, have you?

Collect the data. Suggest the reason for the results, and let others either refute or support your suggestion. That's how science works.

DocJock

8,341 posts

239 months

Wednesday 1st July 2020
quotequote all
Aw fkk it, I've let myself get dragged in again. getmecoat

Gadgetmac

14,984 posts

107 months

Wednesday 1st July 2020
quotequote all
DocJock said:
Aw fkk it, I've let myself get dragged in again. getmecoat
hehe

robinessex

11,046 posts

180 months

Wednesday 1st July 2020
quotequote all
I've written aircraft Flight Certification Structural reports. You'd never get away with a 'suggest' there. You have to have concrete proof with calculations, which are always sent for independent stress checking. If the numbers don't add up, you're screwed.

durbster

10,223 posts

221 months

Wednesday 1st July 2020
quotequote all
robinessex said:
I've written aircraft Flight Certification Structural reports. You'd never get away with a 'suggest' there. You have to have concrete proof with calculations, which are always sent for independent stress checking. If the numbers don't add up, you're screwed.
Setting aside how terrifying that thought is, you're comparing a collation of readings against projecting what readings might be in the future.

I can write a report that states how many points Liverpool have today but I can only "guess" how many points they'll end the season with.

Do you understand there's a difference between those two forms of analysis?

robinessex

11,046 posts

180 months

Wednesday 1st July 2020
quotequote all
durbster said:
robinessex said:
I've written aircraft Flight Certification Structural reports. You'd never get away with a 'suggest' there. You have to have concrete proof with calculations, which are always sent for independent stress checking. If the numbers don't add up, you're screwed.
Setting aside how terrifying that thought is, you're comparing a collation of readings against projecting what readings might be in the future.

I can write a report that states how many points Liverpool have today but I can only "guess" how many points they'll end the season with.

Do you understand there's a difference between those two forms of analysis?
CC is supposed to be science. With provable, repeatable data, and a conclusion. Not subjective crap. I note you are still posting derogatory remarks Durbs, again, because you've nothing to add.

PS. Better not fly in the A380 then Durbs, I did some analysis to make sure the wings don't fall off.

Here's proof they won't. Nice when you get your calculations proved by a practical test.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=--LTYRTKV_A

Edited by robinessex on Wednesday 1st July 17:08

Gadgetmac

14,984 posts

107 months

Wednesday 1st July 2020
quotequote all
robinessex said:
I've written aircraft Flight Certification Structural reports. You'd never get away with a 'suggest' there. You have to have concrete proof with calculations, which are always sent for independent stress checking. If the numbers don't add up, you're screwed.
I have no idea how you got to that position considering you've demonstrated that you can't even comprehend a simple graph or understand the Sun/Earth relationship when its explained you.

Anyway with all of that knowledge perhaps you can now give me your analysis of where the science (and the international team of scientists who took part in the research) are wrong? You have the data sources and the calc methods and the report itself is available wink
I'd take even an inkling of you demonstrating that you could comprehend any of it as success on your part. biggrin